Search

Summary: Background: It is unknown if early COVID-19 monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapy can reduce risk of Long COVID. The mAbs amubarvimab/romlusevimab were previously demonstrated to reduce risk of hospitalization/death by 79%. This study assessed the impact of amubarvimab/romlusevimab on late outcomes, including Long COVID. Methods: Non-hospitalized high-risk adults within 10 days of COVID-19 symptom onset enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2/3 trial of amubarvimab/romlusevimab for COVID-19 treatment. Late symptoms, assessed using a participant-completed symptom diary, were a pre-specified exploratory endpoint. The primary outcome for this analysis was the composite of Long COVID by participant self-report (presence of COVID-19 symptoms as recorded in the diary at week 36) or hospitalization or death by week 36. Inverse probability weighting (IPW) was used to address incomplete outcome ascertainment, giving weighted risk ratios (wRR) comparing amubarvimab/romlusevimab to placebo. Findings: Participants received amubarvimab/romlusevimab (n = 390) or placebo (n = 390) between January and July 2021. Median age was 49 years, 52% were female, 18% Black/African American, 49% Hispanic/Latino, and 9% COVID-19-vaccinated at entry. At week 36, 103 (13%) had incomplete outcome ascertainment, and 66 (17%) on amubarvimab/romlusevimab and 92 (24%) on placebo met the primary outcome (wRR = 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53–0.93). The difference was driven by fewer hospitalizations/deaths with amubarvimab/romlusevimab (4%) than placebo (13%). Among 652 participants with available diary responses, 53 (16%) on amubarvimab/romlusevimab and 44 (14%) on placebo reported presence of Long COVID. Interpretation: Amubarvimab/romlusevimab treatment, while highly effective in preventing hospitalizations/deaths, did not reduce risk of Long COVID. Additional interventions are needed to prevent Long COVID. Funding: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health. Amubarvimab and romlusevimab supplied by Brii Biosciences.

Summary: Background: Although immunomodulators have established benefit against the new coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in general, it is uncertain whether such agents improve outcomes without increasing the risk of secondary infections in the specific subgroup of previously immunocompromised patients. We assessed the effect of immunomodulators on outcomes of immunocompromised patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods: The protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022335397). MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and references of relevant articles were searched up to 01-06-2022. Authors of potentially eligible randomized controlled trials were contacted to provide data on immunocompromised patients randomized to immunomodulators vs control (i.e., placebo or standard-of-care). Findings: Eleven randomized controlled trials involving 397 immunocompromised patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were included. Ten trials had low risk of bias. There was no difference between immunocompromised patients randomized to immunomodulators vs control regarding mortality [30/182 (16.5%) vs 41/215 (19.1%); RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.61–1.41; p = 0.74], secondary infections (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.64–1.58; p = 0.99) and change in World Health Organization ordinal scale from baseline to day 15 (weighed mean difference 0.27, 95% CI -0.09–0.63; p = 0.15). In subgroup analyses including only patients with hematologic malignancy, only trials with low risk of bias, only trials administering IL-6 inhibitors, or only trials administering immunosuppressants, there was no difference between comparators regarding mortality. Interpretation: Immunomodulators, compared to control, were not associated with harmful or beneficial outcomes, including mortality, secondary infections, and change in ordinal scale, when administered to immunocompromised patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Funding: Hellenic Foundation for Research and Innovation.

Summary: Background: With the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants resistant to monoclonal antibody therapies and limited global access to therapeutics, the evaluation of novel therapeutics to prevent progression to severe COVID-19 remains a critical need. Methods: Safety, clinical and antiviral efficacy of inhaled interferon-β1a (SNG001) were evaluated in a phase II randomized controlled trial on the ACTIV-2/A5401 platform (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04518410). Adult outpatients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 10 days of symptom onset were randomized and initiated either orally inhaled nebulized SNG001 given once daily for 14 days (n = 110) or blinded pooled placebo (n = 110) between February 10 and August 18, 2021. Findings: The proportion of participants reporting premature treatment discontinuation was 9% among SNG001 and 13% among placebo participants. There were no differences between participants who received SNG001 or placebo in the primary outcomes of treatment emergent Grade 3 or higher adverse events (3.6% and 8.2%, respectively), time to symptom improvement (median 13 and 9 days, respectively), or proportion with unquantifiable nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 RNA at days 3 (28% [26/93] vs. 39% [37/94], respectively), 7 (65% [60/93] vs. 66% [62/94]) and 14 (91% [86/95] vs. 91% [83/81]). There were fewer hospitalizations with SNG001 (n = 1; 1%) compared with placebo (n = 7; 6%), representing an 86% relative risk reduction (p = 0.07). There were no deaths in either arm. Interpretation: In this trial, SNG001 was safe and associated with a non-statistically significant decrease in hospitalization for COVID-19 pneumonia. Funding: The ACTIV-2 platform study is funded by the NIH. Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number UM1 AI068634, UM1 AI068636 and UM1 AI106701. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Background: A vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 is of high urgency. Here the safety and immunogenicity induced by a DNA vaccine (INO-4800) targeting the full length spike antigen of SARS-CoV-2 are described. Methods: INO-4800 was evaluated in two groups of 20 participants, receiving either 1.0 mg or 2.0 mg of vaccine intradermally followed by CELLECTRA® EP at 0 and 4 weeks. Thirty-nine subjects completed both doses; one subject in the 2.0 mg group discontinued trial participation prior to receiving the second dose. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04336410. Findings: The median age was 34.5, 55% (22/40) were men and 82.5% (33/40) white. Through week 8, only 6 related Grade 1 adverse events in 5 subjects were observed. None of these increased in frequency with the second administration. No serious adverse events were reported. All 38 subjects evaluable for immunogenicity had cellular and/or humoral immune responses following the second dose of INO-4800. By week 6, 95% (36/38) of the participants seroconverted based on their responses by generating binding (ELISA) and/or neutralizing antibodies (PRNT IC50), with responder geometric mean binding antibody titers of 655.5 [95% CI (255.6, 1681.0)] and 994.2 [95% CI (395.3, 2500.3)] in the 1.0 mg and 2.0 mg groups, respectively. For neutralizing antibody, 78% (14/18) and 84% (16/19) generated a response with corresponding geometric mean titers of 102.3 [95% CI (37.4, 280.3)] and 63.5 [95% CI (39.6, 101.8)], in the respective groups. By week 8, 74% (14/19) and 100% (19/19) of subjects generated T cell responses by IFN-ɣ ELISpot assay with the median SFU per 106 PBMC of 46 [95% CI (21.1, 142.2)] and 71 [95% CI (32.2, 194.4)] in the 1.0 mg and 2.0 mg groups, respectively. Flow cytometry demonstrated a T cell response, dominated by CD8+ T cells co-producing IFN-ɣ and TNF-α, without increase in IL-4. Interpretation: INO-4800 demonstrated excellent safety and tolerability and was immunogenic in 100% (38/38) of the vaccinated subjects by eliciting either or both humoral or cellular immune responses. Funding: Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).

Background: A comprehensive understanding of host factors modulated by the antiviral cytokine interferon-α (IFNα) is imperative for harnessing its beneficial effects while avoiding its detrimental side-effects during HIV infection. Cytokines modulate host glycosylation which plays a critical role in mediating immunological functions. However, the impact of IFNα on host glycosylation has never been characterized. Methods: We assessed the impact of pegylated IFNα2a on IgG glycome, as well as CD8+ T and NK cell-surface glycomes, of 18 HIV-infected individuals on suppressive antiretroviral therapy. We linked these glycomic signatures to changes in inflammation, CD8+ T and NK cell phenotypes, and HIV DNA. Findings: We identified significant interactions that support a model in which a) IFNα increases the proportion of pro-inflammatory, bisecting GlcNAc glycans (known to enhance FcγR binding) within the IgG glycome, which in turn b) increases inflammation, which c) leads to poor CD8+ T cell phenotypes and poor IFNα-mediated reduction of HIV DNA. Examining cell-surface glycomes, IFNα increases levels of the immunosuppressive GalNAc-containing glycans (T/Tn antigens) on CD8+ T cells. This induction is associated with lower HIV-gag-specific CD8+ T cell functions. Last, IFNα increases levels of fucose on NK cells. This induction is associated with higher NK functions upon K562 stimulation. Interpretation: IFNα causes host glycomic alterations that are known to modulate immunological responses. These alterations are associated with both detrimental and beneficial consequences of IFNα. Manipulating host glycomic interactions may represent a strategy for enhancing the positive effects of IFNα while avoiding its detrimental side-effects. Funding: NIH grants R21AI143385, U01AI110434.

Objetivo: Estudiar la prevalencia del diagnóstico tardío (DT) de la infección por el virus de la inmunodeficiencia humana (VIH) y sus factores asociados. Métodos: Estudio transversal sobre los pacientes incluidos en la cohorte VACH cuya infección por el VIH hubiese sido diagnosticada entre 1997 y 2002. Consideramos DT los casos diagnosticados de sida concomitantemente o dentro del primer mes desde la primera serología positiva, o con recuento de CD4+ < 200/ml. Comparamos sus características epidemiológicas con las de los demás pacientes. Resultados: De 2.820 nuevos casos de infección por el VIH, 506 (18%) tuvieron DT. Éstos difirieron del resto en su menor edad media, mayor carga viral y en su distribución por sexos (mayor proporción de hombres), situación laboral, antecedentes penitenciarios y grupo de riesgo. La mediana de supervivencia durante el seguimiento fue menor en el grupo de DT. Conclusiones: El DT continúa siendo un problema preocupante por su magnitud y asociación con la mortalidad. Algunas características epidemiológicas proporcionan indicios para orientar futuros programas de información y prevención.Objective: To study the prevalence of delayed diagnosis of HIV infection and associated factors. Methods: A cross sectional study of patients included in the Spanish VACH cohort who had been diagnosed with HIV infection between 1997 and 2002 was performed. Delayed diagnosis was defined as patients diagnosed with HIV infection and AIDS simultaneously or within the first month after the first positive serologic test, or those with a first CD4+ cell count below 200/ml. The epidemiological characteristics of these patients were compared with those of the remaining patients. Results: Of 2,820 new cases of HIV infection, delayed diagnosis was found in 506 (18%). These patients differed from the remaining patients in their lower mean age and higher HIV viral load, as well as in their distribution by sex (higher proportion of males), occupational status, history of incarceration in prison, and HIV-risk transmission group. The median survival during follow-up was significantly lower among AIDS patients with a delayed diagnosis. Conclusions: Delayed diagnosis remains a cause for concern in our environment, due to its magnitude and its association with mortality. Some epidemiological characteristics provide clues to guide future programs directed at increasing information and improving prevention.

Background: Infection with influenza virus causes substantial morbidity and mortality globally, although antiviral treatments are available. Previous studies have suggested that anti-influenza immune plasma could be beneficial as treatment, but they were not designed as randomised, blinded, placebo-controlled trials. Therefore, we aimed to prospectively evaluate the clinical efficacy of high-titre immune plasma compared with standard low-titre plasma to improve outcomes in patients with severe influenza A infection., Methods: We did this randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial at 41 US medical centres to assess the efficacy of high-titre anti-influenza plasma (haemagglutination inhibition antibody titre ≥1:80) compared with low-titre plasma (≤1:10). Children and adults with PCR-confirmed influenza A infection, a National Early Warning score of 3 or greater, and onset of illness within 6 days before randomisation were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) using an interactive web response system to receive either two units (or paediatric equivalent) of high-titre plasma (high-titre group) or low-titre plasma (low-titre group), and were followed up for 28 days from randomisation. High-titre and low-titre plasma had the same appearance. Randomisation was stratified by severity (in intensive care unit, not in intensive care but requiring supplemental oxygen, or not in intensive care and not requiring supplemental oxygen) and age (<18 years and ≥18 years). All participants, site staff, and the study team were masked to treatment allocation until after the final database lock. The primary endpoint was clinical status assessed by a six-point ordinal scale on day 7 (death, in intensive care, hospitalised but requiring supplemental oxygen, hospitalised not requiring supplemental oxygen, discharged but unable to resume normal activities, and discharged with full resumption of normal activities) analysed in a proportional odds model (an odds ratio [OR] >1 indicates improvement in clinical status across all categories for the high-titre vs the low-titre group). The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population, excluding two participants who did not receive plasma. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02572817., Findings: Participants were recruited between Jan 26, 2016, and April 19, 2018. Of 200 participants enrolled (177 adults and 23 children), 140 met the criteria for randomisation and were assigned to the high-titre group (n=92) or to the control low-titre group (n=48). One participant from each group did not receive plasma. At baseline, 60 (43%) of 138 participants were in intensive care and 55 (71%) of 78 participants who were not in intensive care required oxygen. 93% of planned plasma infusions were completed. The study was terminated in July, 2018, when independent efficacy analysis showed low conditional power to detect an effect of high-titre plasma even if full accrual (150 participants) was achieved. The proportional OR for improved clinical status on day 7 was 1·22 (95% CI 0·65-2·29, p=0·54). 47 (34%) of 138 participants experienced 88 serious adverse events: 32 (35%) with 60 events in the high-titre group and 15 (32%) with 28 events in the low-titre group. The most common serious adverse events were acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS; four [4%] vs two [4%]), allergic transfusion reactions (two [2%] vs two [4%]), and respiratory distress (three [3%] vs none). 65 (47%) participants experienced 183 adverse events: 42 (46%) with 126 events in the high-titre group and 23 (49%) with 57 events in the low-titre group. The most common adverse events were anaemia (four [3%] vs two [4%]) and ARDS (four [3%] vs three [5%]). Ten patients died during the study (six [7%] in the high-titre group vs four [9%] in the low-titre group, p=0·73). The most common cause of death was worsening of acute respiratory distress syndrome (two [2%] vs two [4%] patients)., Interpretation: High-titre anti-influenza plasma conferred no significant benefit over non-immune plasma. Although our study did not have the precision to rule out a small, clinically relevant effect, the benefit is insufficient to justify the use of immune plasma for treating patients with severe influenza A., Funding: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases of the National Institutes of Health (Bethesda, MD, USA)., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Vaccines are considered one of the greatest advances in modern medicine. The global burden of numerous infectious diseases has been significantly reduced, and in some cases, effectively eradicated through the deployment of specific vaccines. However, efforts to develop effective new vaccines against infectious pathogens such as influenza, Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), dengue virus (DENV), chikungunya virus (CHIKV), Ebola virus, and Zika virus (ZIKV) have proven challenging. Zika virus is a mosquito-vectored flavivirus responsible for periodic outbreaks of disease in Africa, Southeast Asia, and the Pacific Islands dating back over 50 years. Over this period, ZIKV infections were subclinical in most infected individuals and resulted in mild cases of fever, arthralgia, and rash in others. Concerns about ZIKV changed over the past two years, however, as outbreaks in Brazil, Central American countries, and Caribbean islands revealed novel aspects of infection including vertical and sexual transmission modes. Cases have been reported showing dramatic neurological pathologies including microcephaly and other neurodevelopmental problems in babies born to ZIKV infected mothers, as well as an increased risk of Guillain-Barre syndrome in adults. These findings prompted the World Health Organization to declare ZIKV a public health emergency in 2016, which resulted in expanded efforts to develop ZIKV vaccines and immunotherapeutics. Several ZIKV vaccine candidates that are immunogenic and effective at blocking ZIKV infection in animal models have since been developed, with some of these now being evaluated in the clinic. Additional therapeutics under investigation include anti-ZIKV monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that have been shown to neutralize infection in vitro as well as protect against morbidity in mouse models of ZIKV infection. In this review, we summarize the current understanding of ZIKV biology and describe our efforts to rapidly develop a vaccine against ZIKV., (Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.. All rights reserved.)

A substantial proportion of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) cases recur after completion of antibiotic therapy, and antibiotic cure rates diminish with each recurrence of CDI. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is an effective therapy for recurrent FMT, which otherwise requires prolonged or indefinite antibiotic treatment. FMT is performed by introducing the fecal microbial community obtained from a healthy donor or pool of donors into the stomach, small intestine, or colon of a patient with CDI. Multiple clinical trials support the usefulness of FMT in treating recurrent CDI, and CDI treatment guidelines now include consideration of FMT at the third CDI recurrence. However, there remain challenges to incorporating FMT into clinical practice. First, methods of fecal bacterial community processing vary, as do methods of FMT administration. Second, the optimal dosing strategy and expected benefit of FMT for refractory CDI, particularly for severe and severe complicated cases, are uncertain. Third, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considers FMT an investigational treatment. Fourth, insurance reimbursement for FMT usually falls short of FMT administration costs. In the setting of rising C difficile incidence and growing evidence for FMT efficacy, the demand for FMT has increased. However, uncertainty surrounding optimal FMT preparation and administration methods, FDA oversight, and insurance reimbursement presently limits the clinical practice of FMT., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Integrase strand transfer inhibitors (INSTIs) are recommended components of initial antiretroviral therapy with two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Bictegravir is a novel, potent INSTI with a high in-vitro barrier to resistance and low potential as a perpetrator or victim of clinically relevant drug-drug interactions. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of bictegravir coformulated with emtricitabine and tenofovir alafenamide as a fixed-dose combination versus coformulated dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine., Methods: We did this double-blind, multicentre, active-controlled, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial at 122 outpatient centres in nine countries in Europe, Latin America, and North America. We enrolled HIV-1 infected adults (aged ≥18 years) who were previously untreated (HIV-1 RNA ≥500 copies per mL); HLA-B*5701-negative; had no hepatitis B virus infection; screening genotypes showing sensitivity to emtricitabine, tenofovir, lamivudine, and abacavir; and an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 50 mL/min or more. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), via a computer-generated allocation sequence (block size of four), to receive coformulated bictegravir 50 mg, emtricitabine 200 mg, and tenofovir alafenamide 25 mg or coformulated dolutegravir 50 mg, abacavir 600 mg, and lamivudine 300 mg, with matching placebo, once daily for 144 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by HIV-1 RNA (≤100 000 copies per mL, >100 000 to ≤400 000 copies per mL, or >400 000 copies per mL), CD4 count (<50 cells per μL, 50-199 cells per μL, or ≥200 cells per μL), and region (USA or ex-USA). Investigators, participants, and study staff giving treatment, assessing outcomes, and collecting data were masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with plasma HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL at week 48, as defined by the US Food and Drug Administration snapshot algorithm, with a prespecified non-inferiority margin of -12%. All participants who received one dose of study drug were included in primary efficacy and safety analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02607930., Findings: Between Nov 13, 2015, and July 14, 2016, we randomly assigned 631 participants to receive coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide (n=316) or coformulated dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine (n=315), of whom 314 and 315 patients, respectively, received at least one dose of study drug. At week 48, HIV-1 RNA less than 50 copies per mL was achieved in 92·4% of patients (n=290 of 314) in the bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide group and 93·0% of patients (n=293 of 315) in the dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine group (difference -0·6%, 95·002% CI -4·8 to 3·6; p=0·78), demonstrating non-inferiority of bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide to dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine. No individual developed treatment-emergent resistance to any study drug. Incidence and severity of adverse events was mostly similar between groups except for nausea, which occurred less frequently in patients given bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide than in those given dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine (10% [n=32] vs 23% [n=72]; p<0·0001). Adverse events related to study drug were less common with bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide than with dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine (26% [n=82] vs 40% [n=127]), the difference being driven by a higher incidence of drug-related nausea in the dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine group (5% [n=17] vs 17% [n=55]; p<0·0001)., Interpretation: At 48 weeks, coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide achieved virological suppression in 92% of previously untreated adults and was non-inferior to coformulated dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine, with no treatment-emergent resistance. Bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide was safe and well tolerated with better gastrointestinal tolerability than dolutegravir, abacavir, and lamivudine. Because coformulated bictegravir, emtricitabine, and tenofovir alafenamide does not require HLA B*5701 testing and provides guideline-recommended treatment for individuals co-infected with HIV and hepatitis B, this regimen might lend itself to rapid or same-day initiation of therapy in the clinical setting., Funding: Gilead Sciences., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Influenza causes substantial morbidity and mortality despite available treatments. Anecdotal reports suggest that plasma with high antibody titres to influenza might be of benefit in the treatment of severe influenza., Methods: In this randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 2 trial, 29 academic medical centres in the USA assessed the safety and efficacy of anti-influenza plasma with haemagglutination inhibition antibody titres of 1:80 or more to the infecting strain. Hospitalised children and adults (including pregnant women) with severe influenza A or B (defined as the presence of hypoxia or tachypnoea) were randomly assigned to receive either two units (or paediatric equivalent) of anti-influenza plasma plus standard care, versus standard care alone, and were followed up for 28 days. The primary endpoint was time to normalisation of patients' respiratory status (respiratory rate of ≤20 breaths per min for adults or age-defined thresholds of 20-38 breaths per min for children) and a room air oxygen saturation of 93% or more. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01052480., Findings: Between Jan 13, 2011, and March 2, 2015, 113 participants were screened for eligibility and 98 were randomly assigned from 20 out of 29 participating sites. Of the participants with confirmed influenza (by PCR), 28 (67%) of 42 in the plasma plus standard care group normalised their respiratory status by day 28 compared with 24 (53%) of 45 participants on standard care alone (p=0·069). The hazard ratio (HR) comparing plasma plus standard care with standard care alone was 1·71 (95% CI 0·96-3·06). Six participants died, one (2%) from the plasma plus standard care group and five (10%) from the standard care group (HR 0·19 [95% CI 0·02-1·65], p=0·093). Participants in the plasma plus standard care group had non-significant reductions in days in hospital (median 6 days [IQR 4-16] vs 11 days [5-25], p=0·13) and days on mechanical ventilation (median 0 days [IQR 0-6] vs 3 days [0-14], p=0·14). Fewer plasma plus standard care participants had serious adverse events compared with standard care alone recipients (nine [20%] of 46 vs 20 [38%] of 52, p=0·041), the most frequent of which were acute respiratory distress syndrome (one [2%] vs two [4%] patients) and stroke (one [2%] vs two [4%] patients)., Interpretation: Although there was no significant effect of plasma treatment on the primary endpoint, the treatment seemed safe and well tolerated. A phase 3 randomised trial is now underway to further assess this intervention., Funding: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, US National Institutes of Health., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The prerequisite for an 'undetectable' HIV viral load has restricted access to transplantation for HIV-infected kidney recipients. However, HCV-infected recipients, owing to the historic limitations of HCV therapy in patients with renal disease, are commonly viremic at transplant and have universal access. To compare the effect of HIV, HCV, and HIV/HCV coinfection on kidney transplant patient and allograft outcomes, we performed a retrospective study of kidney recipients transplanted from January 1996 through December 2013. In multivariable analysis, patient (hazard ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.66-1.24) and allograft survival (0.60, 40-0.88) in 492 HIV patients did not differ significantly from the 117,791 patient-uninfected reference group. This was superior to outcomes in both the 5605 patient HCV group for death (1.44, 1.33-1.56) and graft loss (1.43, 1.31-1.56), as well as the 147 patient HIV/HCV coinfected group for death (2.26, 1.45-3.52) and graft loss (2.59, 1.60-4.19). HIV infection did not adversely affect recipient or allograft survival and was associated with superior outcomes compared with both HCV infection and HIV/HCV coinfection in this population. Thus, pretransplant viral eradication and/or immediate posttransplant eradication should be studied as potential strategies to improve posttransplant outcomes in HCV-infected kidney recipients., Competing Interests: The authors declare no financial or intellectual conflicts of interest relevant to this article.

We report the safety and tolerability of 87 infusions of lentiviral vector–modified autologous CD4 T cells (VRX496-T; trade name, Lexgenleucel-T) in 17 HIV patients with well-controlled viremia. Antiviral effects were studied during analytic treatment interruption in a subset of 13 patients. VRX496-T was associated with a decrease in viral load set points in 6 of 8 subjects (P = .08). In addition, A → G transitions were enriched in HIV sequences after infusion, which is consistent with a model in which transduced CD4 T cells exert antisense-mediated genetic pressure on HIV during infection. Engraftment of vector-modified CD4 T cells was measured in gut-associated lymphoid tissue and was correlated with engraftment in blood. The engraftment half-life in the blood was approximately 5 weeks, with stable persistence in some patients for up to 5 years. Conditional replication of VRX496 was detected periodically through 1 year after infusion. No evidence of clonal selection of lentiviral vector–transduced T cells or integration enrichment near oncogenes was detected. This is the first demonstration that gene-modified cells can exert genetic pressure on HIV. We conclude that gene-modified T cells have the potential to decrease the fitness of HIV-1 and conditionally replicative lentiviral vectors have a promising safety profile in T cells.